Over 50% of the DDay landing troops were british
And actually, the US is the center of the world today, even though I dislike it and you probably do as well.
Just to clear some things up and to tell USA that they are not the centre of the world and they did not win WW2 alone. We appreciate your support however.
What the crap? try telling that to the 6 billion+ people that don't live in the US.
The US is the center of the military world, the political word, the economic world, the western cultural world, and at this point is basically the center of the anglosphere. Sorry UK, you no longer rule the waves.
Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty left leaning and I dislike all this USA imperialism bullshit, but it's hard to deny facts.
The US is the center of the military world, the political word, the economic world, the western cultural world, and at this point is basically the center of the anglosphere. Sorry UK, you no longer rule the waves.
Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty left leaning and I dislike all this USA imperialism bullshit, but it's hard to deny facts.
If only those were facts.
The US may have the most powerful military on earth, they may hold a lot of sway politically and American culture is pretty widely exported (though perhaps not nearly as much as a lot of people seem to think). None of this, however, equates to them being the centre of the world. Actually, I'm not even sure what that means. Do you mean they're the most important country or what?
You should thank the US for being there in the fight, giving the Allies some reassuring hope, and plenty of more men to fight the good fight.
Israel is probably the most important as of now. I mean look at all the hate feelings toward it in the middle east, and how people in congress get bashed if they don't side with them.The US is the center of the military world, the political word, the economic world, the western cultural world, and at this point is basically the center of the anglosphere. Sorry UK, you no longer rule the waves.
Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty left leaning and I dislike all this USA imperialism bullshit, but it's hard to deny facts.
If only those were facts.
The US may have the most powerful military on earth, they may hold a lot of sway politically and American culture is pretty widely exported (though perhaps not nearly as much as a lot of people seem to think). None of this, however, equates to them being the centre of the world. Actually, I'm not even sure what that means. Do you mean they're the most important country or what?
Yes, the most important country I suppose.
Uh oh, the discussion has turned towards the middle-east. Get out while you can!
Told to change this. So, uhm... Don't talk about the Middle-east which has nothing to do with this threads' purpose!!!???
Again, try telling that to the 6 billion+ people that don't really care about the US or what the US does, and probably don't often think about the US.
Besides, how can one country be more important than another? I'm sure just about everyone on earth regards their own country as the most important, and with good reason.
Again, try telling that to the 6 billion+ people that don't really care about the US or what the US does, and probably don't often think about the US.
Besides, how can one country be more important than another? I'm sure just about everyone on earth regards their own country as the most important, and with good reason.
-Top 10 stock exchanges in the world - top 2 are in the United states
http://www.world-stock-exchanges.net/top10.html
-America has the most powerful military in the world, I don't need to provide any statistics for that.
-America has a permanent seat in the UN security council and veto power in practice over pretty much any nation (Notice I said "in practice". The USA could do whatever it wanted if it wasn't worried about the consequences, which it could probably deal with on its own anyway))
And a bunch of other things that I don't care to argue for right now. Whether or not 6 billion people in the world identify with the US is not relevant. These people are all affected by the United States and its decisions in one way or another, whether they are aware of it or not. The fact that many people dislike the US does not make it any less powerful or important on the world stage. Many, many people disliked and hated the Roman Empire as well, but did that make it any less powerful and influential? Any given thing that you enjoy or use in your daily life has probably had some influence by the United States put into its production, marketing, and circulation. Any company in any given country that wants to be successful has to have connections with the United States or it will fail.
Japan has one of the largest economies in the world, but Japan is a US protectorate. The US is responsible for the protection of Japan and therefore the US exercises complete and utter control over Japan. The European Union was created to act as a counterbalance to the US but it's becoming more and more influenced by the US every day, and it is quickly crumbling.
Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/DuMZp7k.jpg)[close]
Nipplestockings, you say you don't care for "US imperialism bullshit" but are willing to spread factually incorrect information in order to promote the idea that the US is most important country on earth. Do you not see a problem with that?
God you are heartless. I have been studying all day for exams which I am very nervous about, I have been having a hard time in the regiment and it is very stressful as well as losing my major, and I come on this server and am constantly abused and provoked. I please ask an admin to check the logs before confirming that I did the above, there were many witnesses who agreed with me when I said they were teamkilling throughout the maps, which they were (please check logs) and I did not get a single moment of peace, this is really not the thing I need at the moment and I hope someone out there has some sense, maybe someone who knows the stresses of forming a reg and doing exams.
Personally I dont get why we are arguing over some post this kid didnt even write. From what I have got from his recent posts he in quoteGod you are heartless. I have been studying all day for exams which I am very nervous about, I have been having a hard time in the regiment and it is very stressful as well as losing my major, and I come on this server and am constantly abused and provoked. I please ask an admin to check the logs before confirming that I did the above, there were many witnesses who agreed with me when I said they were teamkilling throughout the maps, which they were (please check logs) and I did not get a single moment of peace, this is really not the thing I need at the moment and I hope someone out there has some sense, maybe someone who knows the stresses of forming a reg and doing exams.
Epic eh?
And seeing as this is one of USA's few responses:
Spoiler
Just to clear some things up and to tell USA that they are not the centre of the world and they did not win WW2 alone. We appreciate your support however.
Well, not counting your totally unprovable claim that everything on earth is made with the US in mind, let's focus on your claim that Japan is a US-protectorate and that the US exerts complete and utter control over Japan.
This is completely and utterly (see what I did there?) untrue. The US and Japan have mutually defence agreements and Japan would definitely have hard time defending itself against a country like Russia or China, but if the US is completely responsible for the defence of Japan, how come Japan has the fifth highest military budget on earth? I'd like to see some sources for your claim that the US controls the Japanese government.
Bottom line is that the Allies won WWII and theNazisAxis were defeated.
Wow, you could have just simply said "I respect what you believe but I think you mean German army instead of "The Nazis". No need to call me an idiotBottom line is that the Allies won WWII and theNazisAxis were defeated.
Please, don't be an idiot. The Allies defeated the Axis, not the "Nazis." The "Nazis" weren't an army, it was a political movement in Germany during the 1930s-1940s. I'd say that more than 90% of the German army was simply, the German army. It was Germans fighting for their country. The "Nazis" were involved primarily in the SS and the Gestapo. That's it. And, obviously some of Hitler's right hand-men were "Nazis" as well.
It felt right. I'm just tired of the people who don't know their facts. Lol. I apologize, it was rather harsh of me to say.forgiven and btw
Germans fighting for their country? bullshit. Every German in the army knew that their country had declared unprovoked wars on peaceful nations and that Germany had no legitimate reason to be fighting. They also must have known their country was committing crimes against humanity, or did they think all the Jews, homosexuals and ethnic and religious minorities just vanished into thin air?+1
There are also all the atrocities the Wehrmacht committed.
The myth of the "clean Wehrmacht" has been completely disproven and I recommend you do some reading on it. I'd start with the book The Wehrmacht: History, Myth, Reality. There are plenty of articles online, as well.
Germans fighting for their country? bullshit. Every German in the army knew that their country had declared unprovoked wars on peaceful nations and that Germany had no legitimate reason to be fighting. They also must have known their country was committing crimes against humanity, or did they think all the Jews, homosexuals and ethnic and religious minorities just vanished into thin air?
There are also all the atrocities the Wehrmacht committed.
The myth of the "clean Wehrmacht" has been completely disproven and I recommend you do some reading on it. I'd start with the book The Wehrmacht: History, Myth, Reality. There are plenty of articles online, as well.
Germans fighting for their country? bullshit. Every German in the army knew that their country had declared unprovoked wars on peaceful nations and that Germany had no legitimate reason to be fighting. They also must have known their country was committing crimes against humanity, or did they think all the Jews, homosexuals and ethnic and religious minorities just vanished into thin air?
There are also all the atrocities the Wehrmacht committed.
The myth of the "clean Wehrmacht" has been completely disproven and I recommend you do some reading on it. I'd start with the book The Wehrmacht: History, Myth, Reality. There are plenty of articles online, as well.
Germany had just been through a Depression so bad their money was worth less than wallpaper, homes were desotried and looted, and most of the country was broke.
People do crazy things when their desperate. As much as I despise the Third Riech, I understand WHY Germans went by the "By whtever means" mindset.
Again, I understand, I do NOT condone.
Four things that could have allowed America to win alone.
1. Their Industrial Might was greater than the Russians, who are notrious for their speedy construction of the T-34
2. Their Man Power was largely due to Immigration and thus large families and could yield more troops than Germany and Italy
3. They're isolated from the rest of the world basically and yet they were the only ones able to deliver Invasions from across the oceans.
4. The Americans had yet to face a war of defeat and had a high sense of victory in fighting and thus had the determined mindset to win a long bloody war if needed.
Side Notes, they invented the best Bombers and Fighters(B-25, P-51 Mustang) And were the only nation to give a huge amount of firepower largely due to fielding the M1 Garand (8 Shot Semi Auto .30 cal)
Side Notes, they invented the best Bombers and Fighters(B-25, P-51 Mustang) And were the only nation to give a huge amount of firepower largely due to fielding the M1 Garand (8 Shot Semi Auto .30 cal)
3. This isn't 1812. The Germans had plenty of Falshrimjagers they could have used, or they could have attacked Canada and used that as a FOB against the US. The Atlantic and Pacific were no longer an excuse for saying that the US could stay out of war.
Germans fighting for their country? bullshit. Every German in the army knew that their country had declared unprovoked wars on peaceful nations and that Germany had no legitimate reason to be fighting. They also must have known their country was committing crimes against humanity, or did they think all the Jews, homosexuals and ethnic and religious minorities just vanished into thin air?
There are also all the atrocities the Wehrmacht committed.
The myth of the "clean Wehrmacht" has been completely disproven and I recommend you do some reading on it. I'd start with the book The Wehrmacht: History, Myth, Reality. There are plenty of articles online, as well.
Canada was a British Dominion. Take over Canada, you got a nice place to raid the US. Heck, if the Germans waited 5 years to replenish they could have taken out the western US WITH AID.
Germans fighting for their country? bullshit. Every German in the army knew that their country had declared unprovoked wars on peaceful nations and that Germany had no legitimate reason to be fighting. They also must have known their country was committing crimes against humanity, or did they think all the Jews, homosexuals and ethnic and religious minorities just vanished into thin air?
There are also all the atrocities the Wehrmacht committed.
The myth of the "clean Wehrmacht" has been completely disproven and I recommend you do some reading on it. I'd start with the book The Wehrmacht: History, Myth, Reality. There are plenty of articles online, as well.
Canada was a British Dominion. Take over Canada, you got a nice place to raid the US. Heck, if the Germans waited 5 years to replenish they could have taken out the western US WITH AID.
As I just said, the US and Canada had an agreement that any attack on Canadian soil would be regarded as a declaration of war on the US, so it wouldn't be possible to attack Canada without American intervention.
kpetschulat, how can you possibly say Hitler brought Germany out of the depression? Germany was left in absolute ruin by him. Any wartime boost to the economy was due to the use of hundreds of thousands of slave labourers and the driving of Jews and minorities out of their jobs, to be replaced by "Aryan" Germans.
When I say that the idea of Germans fight for their country is bullshit, I mean the idea that that was a innocent and justified thing to do is bullshit. They probably were fighting for the benefit of their country, but they knew it was at the cost of mankind and that horrible things were involved.
I don't mean to condemn every German that fought in the war, most were probably alright guys and there were some truly great humans in the armies of Germany and Japan, but their fighting in the war was, in my opinion, an inherently wrong thing to do and a great mark on anyone's reputation.
Oh, and don't take the word "bullshit" wrong. Where I'm from it's a fairly innocuous word used in the same way as "nonsense".
You know the Wehrmacht stood for more than just "Those SS officers that commited atrocities".
With Docm's logic, American soldiers were intentionally fighting for American imperialism and FDR's warmongering bloodthirst.
Docm, I know you're just playing devils advocate, and it's impossible to convince you.
Anyway, world war 2 is NOT my forté, so I'm not gonna get involved. Btw, my family was liberated by Canadians, Brits and Gurkhas... So thank you, those people!
Completely different situation. The US was attacked. Germany was not.
The one thing that perhaps gets even more of my goat than the defence of murderers is the mixing up of the words 'forte' and 'forté'. You, Duuring, have committed a crime against language that I can perhaps never forgive. Remember, 'forte' as in someone's strong point is pronounced 'fort', no 'ey' sound. 'for-tey' is a musical term
You're analogy would only work if Operation Iraqi Freedom was actually about getting oil. Duuring, that's the kind of nonsense people who think the WTC attacks were committed by the Bush administration say.
You're analogy would only work if Operation Iraqi Freedom was actually about getting oil. Duuring, that's the kind of nonsense people who think the WTC attacks were committed by the Bush administration say.
Oh, god, no! it's getting to the middle-east again! I'm bailing out for real this time.
All aboard the off-topic train! Choo choo!
Ok here's my view. I am British and I can understand why you'd like to think america thinks they won. But it's clear they don't......wot
On the subject of who won. It was a joint effort between all the nations. The British army could sill have lost in Agrica if America didn't step in. British would have lost the battle of British without the pressure buildin on the eastern front. America would not have won in the east without the british and Australian forces attacking the Japanese in Burma, making tem fight on two fronts.
It was an allied victory. Nothing more or less.
The final push on the German forces was the Russian push into Berlin, and they captured it. They, officially won the war but any soldier from
Any army fighting will tell you it's an allied victory and I agree.
the backwoods-toothless hicks that you find in the southThe north has backwoods-toothless hicks too.
the backwoods-toothless hicks that you find in the southThe north has backwoods-toothless hicks too.
Am I the only one that no-one, and absolutely no-one (not soldiers, not civs, nobody) is actually innoce in any war?
I found this and thought it was pretty awesome:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110317235113AALrae8
First off, let me just say that the United states of america played a vital role in the Allied military efforts of ww2. Many brave americans fought hand in hand with soldiers of my mother country, The United Kingdom of great britain. My gripe is not with the American soldiers, but with the media and film-makers that push a false version of history.
American citizens watching american movies such as Saving private ryan or TV shows such as Band of brothers would be justified in thinking that America won the war alone. They would be justified in thinking that europe was in trouble and that America came to save the day. That is the version of history that American movies portray and that is the version of history that many Americans believe.
A little knowledge fo history reveals a different story. The DDay landings were comprised of soldiers from the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New zealand. Over half of the soldiers were british.
Germany suffered more losses by far on its eastern front and if one military should be named as having won the WW2 alone it would surely have to be that of the Soviet Union.
In the American movie "Pearl harbour" an american pilot single Handel won the battle for britain..lol
So why do Americans not credit the soldiers of other countries? Why do they tend to over inflate their achievements? Many Americans don't realize that they officially lost the conflict in vietnam.
The US fought the war mainly with japan. Over 50% of the DDay landing troops were british and britain also managed to defend against invasion. We destroyed the luftwaffe and were certainly not on a back foot. Not considering that we also fought the war in Africa and managed to defeat german and italian forces there to.
The soviet Union destroyed many more german troops than all the rest of the allied forces combined.
Also another person in the comments stated that "We win everything alone, that is us, the USA"... Really? The rest of the world exited WW2 having been extremely decimated, whereas the US was untouched. It is because of this that the USA rose to the position of the only superpower left in the world today. However, japan is second despite having been destroyed in WW2 and china is overtaking you. London is now the worlds
Epic eh?
And seeing as this is one of USA's few responses:SpoilerVietnam - War of Independence in USA
Both had crucial turning points- Saratoga and Tet. Both Civil Wars. Guerilla style warfare. Both were fighting over government. Outside countries were not supportive of wars. Only 1 of the 2 sides had issued uniforms. Both used guns and gun powder. Both were fought over vast distances with long lines of communication. Both wars triggered animosity among the common people. The undecided were alienated and the strategies were analogous.[close]
Just to clear some things up and to tell USA that they are not the centre of the world and they did not win WW2 alone. We appreciate your support however.
I took a little to see this thread, but now I have found it, here is my contribution.
Hollywood and a lot of persons here always paint the german soldiers as if they were some kind of religious fanatics obsessed with killing the jews and things of that kind, but they weren't. They were only fighting for their country not the ideology of the leader of Germany in that moment of the history.
But the SS, that's a different history.
I am sure that if the allies didn't declared the war to Germany when the invasion of Poland occurred then the Second World War might break out because the incessant tensions between the Allies and the Axis, by one way or another all the roads lead to the second world war as the nationalism and the revanchism in Germany was already extremely high.
but I consider myself an American...
As a German myself
I took a little to see this thread, but now I have found it, here is my contribution.
Hollywood and a lot of persons here always paint the german soldiers as if they were some kind of religious fanatics obsessed with killing the jews and things of that kind, but they weren't. They were only fighting for their country not the ideology of the leader of Germany in that moment of the history.
But the SS, that's a different history.
I am sure that if the allies didn't declared the war to Germany when the invasion of Poland occurred then the Second World War might break out because the incessant tensions between the Allies and the Axis, by one way or another all the roads lead to the second world war as the nationalism and the revanchism in Germany was already extremely high.
After the first world war the allies owed the US huge sums of money, as the bulk of the American war effort during the first world war had been loans of weapons and cash to the UK and France. Of course Europe was financially exhausted after the first world war, so France and UK could not pay back their debts. Of course, US businessmen needed *mhemm* that money, so they pushed the UK and France to pay back their debts. They cordially suggested that Germany would be a good source of income, since, after all they were to blame for the war ::). The UK and France were not so sure about this but the US businessmen assured them that all would be well. So that's a major reason why Germany had all its worth sucked out of it, and that's why its economy collapsed, and that's why Hitler was able to take power, and that's why ww2 started.
"Us" really? You probably weren't even born in WW2 pisses me off everytime someone says "we" or "us" won a war, or a football match, like "We destoryed you 2 nill" and that's some chav watching at home. Plus America is not the center of the world, if you think about it the more countries that do well is like Turkey and Japan. Turkey's economy is booming with Tourists and citys like Dubai are one of the richest in the world. And Japan can make some of the best devices and gadgets around, instance cars, TVs, Phones. And much.The US is the center of the military world, the political word, the economic world, the western cultural world, and at this point is basically the center of the anglosphere. Sorry UK, you no longer rule the waves.
Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty left leaning and I dislike all this USA imperialism bullshit, but it's hard to deny facts.
If only those were facts.
The US may have the most powerful military on earth, they may hold a lot of sway politically and American culture is pretty widely exported (though perhaps not nearly as much as a lot of people seem to think). None of this, however, equates to them being the centre of the world. Actually, I'm not even sure what that means. Do you mean they're the most important country or what?
Yes, the most important country I suppose.QuoteYou should thank the US for being there in the fight, giving the Allies some reassuring hope, and plenty of more men to fight the good fight.
Thankfully the older generation in Europe still likes the United States and appreciates us for the efforts and sacrifices of US soldiers during ww2. Unfortunately the younger generation seems to have been swept up in an anti-US bandwagon of sorts. I guess it's cool to hate the US in Europe now.
You know the Wehrmacht stood for more than just "Those SS officers that commited atrocities".
Allow me to direct you to the Wehrmachtsausstellung (http://www.verbrechen-der-wehrmacht.de/pdf/vdw_en.pdf) and Wikipedia's article on War crimes of the Wehrmacht (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht).
The Wehrmacht was responsible for a huge number of war crimes and violations of international law. There was also no way that the average German, and by extension the average German soldier, was ignorant of the crimes being committed by their country. There was no way they missed Kristallnacht or other mass removals of Jews and minorities, or the uses of hundreds of thousands of slave labourers. There's no way word didn't spread through the Wehrmachts ranks of the war crimes being committed by themselves and the political armies. There's no way they thought their country was defending itself. There was no way.
I took a little to see this thread, but now I have found it, here is my contribution.
Hollywood and a lot of persons here always paint the german soldiers as if they were some kind of religious fanatics obsessed with killing the jews and things of that kind, but they weren't. They were only fighting for their country not the ideology of the leader of Germany in that moment of the history.
But the SS, that's a different history.
I am sure that if the allies didn't declared the war to Germany when the invasion of Poland occurred then the Second World War might break out because the incessant tensions between the Allies and the Axis, by one way or another all the roads lead to the second world war as the nationalism and the revanchism in Germany was already extremely high.
After the first world war the allies owed the US huge sums of money, as the bulk of the American war effort during the first world war had been loans of weapons and cash to the UK and France. Of course Europe was financially exhausted after the first world war, so France and UK could not pay back their debts. Of course, US businessmen needed *mhemm* that money, so they pushed the UK and France to pay back their debts. They cordially suggested that Germany would be a good source of income, since, after all they were to blame for the war ::). The UK and France were not so sure about this but the US businessmen assured them that all would be well. So that's a major reason why Germany had all its worth sucked out of it, and that's why its economy collapsed, and that's why Hitler was able to take power, and that's why ww2 started.
USA USA USA USA USA USA
"Us" really? You probably weren't even born in WW2 pisses me off everytime someone says "we" or "us" won a war, or a football match, like "We destoryed you 2 nill" and that's some chav watching at home. Plus America is not the center of the world, if you think about it the more countries that do well is like Turkey and Japan. Turkey's economy is booming with Tourists and citys like Dubai are one of the richest in the world. And Japan can make some of the best devices and gadgets around, instance cars, TVs, Phones. And much.The US is the center of the military world, the political word, the economic world, the western cultural world, and at this point is basically the center of the anglosphere. Sorry UK, you no longer rule the waves.
Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty left leaning and I dislike all this USA imperialism bullshit, but it's hard to deny facts.
If only those were facts.
The US may have the most powerful military on earth, they may hold a lot of sway politically and American culture is pretty widely exported (though perhaps not nearly as much as a lot of people seem to think). None of this, however, equates to them being the centre of the world. Actually, I'm not even sure what that means. Do you mean they're the most important country or what?
Yes, the most important country I suppose.QuoteYou should thank the US for being there in the fight, giving the Allies some reassuring hope, and plenty of more men to fight the good fight.
Thankfully the older generation in Europe still likes the United States and appreciates us for the efforts and sacrifices of US soldiers during ww2. Unfortunately the younger generation seems to have been swept up in an anti-US bandwagon of sorts. I guess it's cool to hate the US in Europe now.
I respect Amercia, and I like the country, like if I'm going on holiday or anything. But when people from America or Britain say either of them are the greatest in the world is probably bullshit. "All Amercians are fat, and lazy and eat Mcdonalds for breakfast, lunch and dinner", "All English drink tea and crumpets (Which are delicous.) with wooden teeth" and lets not forget "Scottish are bagpiping, haggis eating, skirt wearing, barbarian killing machines" The Scottish one is true after all I live there.
But all these things really are in mature. Can't you ALL just start being friends, WWII is over. all the Allies helped each other in it. The Axis lost yes. But nowadays Germany, Japan etc are some of the richest countries in the world. So stop bickering and be friends! :-)
"Us" really? You probably weren't even born in WW2 pisses me off everytime someone says "we" or "us" won a war, or a football match, like "We destoryed you 2 nill" and that's some chav watching at home. Plus America is not the center of the world, if you think about it the more countries that do well is like Turkey and Japan. Turkey's economy is booming with Tourists and citys like Dubai are one of the richest in the world. And Japan can make some of the best devices and gadgets around, instance cars, TVs, Phones. And much.The US is the center of the military world, the political word, the economic world, the western cultural world, and at this point is basically the center of the anglosphere. Sorry UK, you no longer rule the waves.
Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty left leaning and I dislike all this USA imperialism bullshit, but it's hard to deny facts.
If only those were facts.
The US may have the most powerful military on earth, they may hold a lot of sway politically and American culture is pretty widely exported (though perhaps not nearly as much as a lot of people seem to think). None of this, however, equates to them being the centre of the world. Actually, I'm not even sure what that means. Do you mean they're the most important country or what?
Yes, the most important country I suppose.QuoteYou should thank the US for being there in the fight, giving the Allies some reassuring hope, and plenty of more men to fight the good fight.
Thankfully the older generation in Europe still likes the United States and appreciates us for the efforts and sacrifices of US soldiers during ww2. Unfortunately the younger generation seems to have been swept up in an anti-US bandwagon of sorts. I guess it's cool to hate the US in Europe now.
I respect Amercia, and I like the country, like if I'm going on holiday or anything. But when people from America or Britain say either of them are the greatest in the world is probably bullshit. "All Amercians are fat, and lazy and eat Mcdonalds for breakfast, lunch and dinner", "All English drink tea and crumpets (Which are delicous.) with wooden teeth" and lets not forget "Scottish are bagpiping, haggis eating, skirt wearing, barbarian killing machines" The Scottish one is true after all I live there.
But all these things really are in mature. Can't you ALL just start being friends, WWII is over. all the Allies helped each other in it. The Axis lost yes. But nowadays Germany, Japan etc are some of the richest countries in the world. So stop bickering and be friends! :-)
Well said, Scorpia!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5FfJ89rGPc[/youtube]
"Us" really? You probably weren't even born in WW2 pisses me off everytime someone says "we" or "us" won a war, or a football match, like "We destoryed you 2 nill" and that's some chav watching at home. Plus America is not the center of the world, if you think about it the more countries that do well is like Turkey and Japan. Turkey's economy is booming with Tourists and citys like Dubai are one of the richest in the world. And Japan can make some of the best devices and gadgets around, instance cars, TVs, Phones. And much.The US is the center of the military world, the political word, the economic world, the western cultural world, and at this point is basically the center of the anglosphere. Sorry UK, you no longer rule the waves.
Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty left leaning and I dislike all this USA imperialism bullshit, but it's hard to deny facts.
If only those were facts.
The US may have the most powerful military on earth, they may hold a lot of sway politically and American culture is pretty widely exported (though perhaps not nearly as much as a lot of people seem to think). None of this, however, equates to them being the centre of the world. Actually, I'm not even sure what that means. Do you mean they're the most important country or what?
Yes, the most important country I suppose.QuoteYou should thank the US for being there in the fight, giving the Allies some reassuring hope, and plenty of more men to fight the good fight.
Thankfully the older generation in Europe still likes the United States and appreciates us for the efforts and sacrifices of US soldiers during ww2. Unfortunately the younger generation seems to have been swept up in an anti-US bandwagon of sorts. I guess it's cool to hate the US in Europe now.
I respect Amercia, and I like the country, like if I'm going on holiday or anything. But when people from America or Britain say either of them are the greatest in the world is probably bullshit. "All Amercians are fat, and lazy and eat Mcdonalds for breakfast, lunch and dinner", "All English drink tea and crumpets (Which are delicous.) with wooden teeth" and lets not forget "Scottish are bagpiping, haggis eating, skirt wearing, barbarian killing machines" The Scottish one is true after all I live there.
But all these things really are in mature. Can't you ALL just start being friends, WWII is over. all the Allies helped each other in it. The Axis lost yes. But nowadays Germany, Japan etc are some of the richest countries in the world. So stop bickering and be friends! :-)
So out of Germany and the US who is currently struggling the most with its economy? I would say Germany is sat there laughing with a lady in power going "Well that was all rather quaint don't you think USA? want to borrow some more money we have plenty nowadays".
Actually the amount owed to the US was very small and paid off within 5 years, it was unified banks started by the Rothchilds who are infact ... well ... German ... finding it a bit of a conincidence that Germany has come out better than the US Economically at the moment?
Spoiler
Nothing like a bit of bean.
I think you should change the title to "Why do MOST Americans think that they won WW2 alone?", because I for one know that even without the US or even the UK, Russia could have won by themselves, and to be honest I don't like being stereotyped in this way.
Just sharing my opinion is all ;)
Four things that could have allowed America to win alone.
1. Their Industrial Might was greater than the Russians, who are notrious for their speedy construction of the T-34
2. Their Man Power was largely due to Immigration and thus large families and could yield more troops than Germany and Italy
3. They're isolated from the rest of the world basically and yet they were the only ones able to deliver Invasions from across the oceans.
4. The Americans had yet to face a war of defeat and had a high sense of victory in fighting and thus had the determined mindset to win a long bloody war if needed.
Side Notes, they invented the best Bombers and Fighters(B-25, P-51 Mustang) And were the only nation to give a huge amount of firepower largely due to fielding the M1 Garand (8 Shot Semi Auto .30 cal)
1. Incorrect, in 1941 US Industry was in a bad position compaired tot he rest of the world. There were many factories but they had HORRIBLE methods.
2. That also means plenty of people who'll fight for the other side. There are a recorded 1,015 Americans who fought for the Wehrmacht in France, plus America had a growing Nazi party of it's own.
3. This isn't 1812. The Germans had plenty of Falshrimjagers they could have used, or they could have attacked Canada and used that as a FOB against the US. The Atlantic and Pacific were no longer an excuse for saying that the US could stay out of war.
4. Ok I agree with this
Also, Germany and Italy? How about Romania, Bulgaria and Japan? Spain could have hopped in also, if they were pressured. The US would have been facing the AXIS POWERS, not two nations.
QuoteSo out of Germany and the US who is currently struggling the most with its economy? I would say Germany is sat there laughing with a lady in power going "Well that was all rather quaint don't you think USA? want to borrow some more money we have plenty nowadays".
Actually the amount owed to the US was very small and paid off within 5 years, it was unified banks started by the Rothchilds who are infact ... well ... German ... finding it a bit of a conincidence that Germany has come out better than the US Economically at the moment?
Spoiler
Nothing like a bit of bean.
Uh, what? That has nothing to do with what I was saying. Please read this.
http://finance.christianpost.com/debt/world_war_one_debts.html
The US also has a stronger economy than Germany today with a GDP of 14.99 trillion USD (2011) compared to Germany's $81.73 million, so I have no idea what you're talking about. The USA also has a GDP per capita of $48,112 compared to Germany's $44,021.
Four things that could have allowed America to win alone.
1. Their Industrial Might was greater than the Russians, who are notrious for their speedy construction of the T-34
2. Their Man Power was largely due to Immigration and thus large families and could yield more troops than Germany and Italy
3. They're isolated from the rest of the world basically and yet they were the only ones able to deliver Invasions from across the oceans.
4. The Americans had yet to face a war of defeat and had a high sense of victory in fighting and thus had the determined mindset to win a long bloody war if needed.
Side Notes, they invented the best Bombers and Fighters(B-25, P-51 Mustang) And were the only nation to give a huge amount of firepower largely due to fielding the M1 Garand (8 Shot Semi Auto .30 cal)
1. Incorrect, in 1941 US Industry was in a bad position compaired tot he rest of the world. There were many factories but they had HORRIBLE methods.
2. That also means plenty of people who'll fight for the other side. There are a recorded 1,015 Americans who fought for the Wehrmacht in France, plus America had a growing Nazi party of it's own.
3. This isn't 1812. The Germans had plenty of Falshrimjagers they could have used, or they could have attacked Canada and used that as a FOB against the US. The Atlantic and Pacific were no longer an excuse for saying that the US could stay out of war.
4. Ok I agree with this
Also, Germany and Italy? How about Romania, Bulgaria and Japan? Spain could have hopped in also, if they were pressured. The US would have been facing the AXIS POWERS, not two nations.
In reply to your comment on # 1, So was every other industry, mainly Russia, at the time, but still they pumped out quality genius in large scales, its not arguable, its fact.
And in reply to your closing statement.
Again, Manpower is actually in favor to the Americans As they all pretty much Left to Escape their home country
Also need I say even if we didnt have the manpower on our side, we still had the fire superiority in our M1 Garands and in our Mustangs and B-25s thus allowing us to cripple threats with ease, and if all else failed, well then Nuke em.
My God, this thread turned into a warzone fast.How do you know what American's would do for their country?
Well, I'm with kpel about the whole "Germans fighting for Germany" thing. I'm not saying Germans didn't know, but nationalism is a pretty hard thing to destroy. I mean look at the US nowadays. There are plenty of people here who would do pretty much anything for America, no matter what other people said.
Never underestimate Jingoism. Britain and France were guilty of this also, along with the older empired of Europe (Including the Turks).
My God, this thread turned into a warzone fast.How do you know what American's would do for their country?
Well, I'm with kpel about the whole "Germans fighting for Germany" thing. I'm not saying Germans didn't know, but nationalism is a pretty hard thing to destroy. I mean look at the US nowadays. There are plenty of people here who would do pretty much anything for America, no matter what other people said.
Never underestimate Jingoism. Britain and France were guilty of this also, along with the older empired of Europe (Including the Turks).
Have you spoken to 300+million people? I think not. Quit judging a full nation based on your experiences with a few Americans.My God, this thread turned into a warzone fast.How do you know what American's would do for their country?
Well, I'm with kpel about the whole "Germans fighting for Germany" thing. I'm not saying Germans didn't know, but nationalism is a pretty hard thing to destroy. I mean look at the US nowadays. There are plenty of people here who would do pretty much anything for America, no matter what other people said.
Never underestimate Jingoism. Britain and France were guilty of this also, along with the older empired of Europe (Including the Turks).
I am an American, and I've spoken to many people who say they'd do anything for the US.
I'm not talking out of my ass here, I'm serious. And I'm not trying to demonize the US or ANY nation, I'm just saying what I know and have learned from my time in the US.
Have you spoken to 300+million people? I think not. Quit judging a full nation based on your experiences with a few Americans.My God, this thread turned into a warzone fast.How do you know what American's would do for their country?
Well, I'm with kpel about the whole "Germans fighting for Germany" thing. I'm not saying Germans didn't know, but nationalism is a pretty hard thing to destroy. I mean look at the US nowadays. There are plenty of people here who would do pretty much anything for America, no matter what other people said.
Never underestimate Jingoism. Britain and France were guilty of this also, along with the older empired of Europe (Including the Turks).
I am an American, and I've spoken to many people who say they'd do anything for the US.
I'm not talking out of my ass here, I'm serious. And I'm not trying to demonize the US or ANY nation, I'm just saying what I know and have learned from my time in the US.
WW2 was an allied victory. The fact is that the americans didn't win everything because there was other nations there. (Although they did play a huge part)
Children are innocent.And so are ponys.
Turkey's economy is booming with Tourists and citys like Dubai are one of the richest in the world.
Turkey's economy is booming with Tourists and citys like Dubai are one of the richest in the world.
Dubai's in the UAE. Not a particularly nice place once you scratch the surface either.
Well I think the only logical response is that many overly patriotic Americans do exaggerate the importance of the USA in the second world war (and sometimes the first), sometimes going as far as to claim they won the entire war themselves, but I think most Americans know that isn't the case, accept that the Soviet Union was the most important ally in the European theater, but that the USA was of vital importance in the second world war nonetheless and it would have gone quite differently without them, but that they did not win the war themselves. I think Americans should brag more about their involvement in the Pacific theater than the European one because they were the biggest allied force there.
Well I think the only logical response is that many overly patriotic Americans do exaggerate the importance of the USA in the second world war (and sometimes the first), sometimes going as far as to claim they won the entire war themselves, but I think most Americans know that isn't the case, accept that the Soviet Union was the most important ally in the European theater, but that the USA was of vital importance in the second world war nonetheless and it would have gone quite differently without them, but that they did not win the war themselves. I think Americans should brag more about their involvement in the Pacific theater than the European one because they were the biggest allied force there.
Exactly. The only time they played an important role was in the Second World War, in the first they joined too late so it wouldn't make a difference in the course of the war.
There were many australians in the Pacific theater aswell.
Actually Bismarck while the Americans didn't play very large of a role in the first world war, they acted as a counterbalance to the Russian withdrawl, which was a serious turn of events. While the Germans were losing and they would probably still have lost even if the Americans didn't join in, Russian surrender gave the Germans serious new resolve and an opportunity to spring back, a resolve that was sundered when the Americans entered and filled the gap in power that the Russians had left in their wake.
Well I think the only logical response is that many overly patriotic Americans do exaggerate the importance of the USA in the second world war (and sometimes the first), sometimes going as far as to claim they won the entire war themselves, but I think most Americans know that isn't the case, accept that the Soviet Union was the most important ally in the European theater, but that the USA was of vital importance in the second world war nonetheless and it would have gone quite differently without them, but that they did not win the war themselves. I think Americans should brag more about their involvement in the Pacific theater than the European one because they were the biggest allied force there.
Exactly. The only time they played an important role was in the Second World War, in the first they joined too late so it wouldn't make a difference in the course of the war.
There were many australians in the Pacific theater aswell.
*still face desk*
Do people not understand that each member was as vital as the next, if it was not for the British and Australian forces in the Pacific Theatre America would of struggled just as much as the next country ... and more than likely lost. I don't think people understand the significance of water and the ocean in General.
Okay think of it like this, imagine attacking a fort with no cannon, your only option is to climb over the wall, but ontop of that wall are people lobbing rocks, poking you with sticks and throwing down your climbing equipment. Much was the same in all beach landings, and the Japenese/Germans had the advantage, the home defencive ... and they used it expertly inflicting 4 to 5 times the losses received and in some cases 10 times the losses.
Without each nations tactical pressure the forces would not of been spread so thinly, thus America would of likely lost pearl habour rather than just lost the battle over it. The japenese had to focus on multiple fronts, by sea they had the American, British and Australians down their necks, to the west were the rebelling chinese and Koreans. Without all these factors combined do you think America would of stood a chance alone as well as fighting the European front? ... hell no.
If America was so vital in the war it would of been able to stand alone, but could it? all wargame thesis point towards no.
No nation played a "Vital role" they were all equal to each others success, this is why it worked, not by having one powerful ally.
Well I think the only logical response is that many overly patriotic Americans do exaggerate the importance of the USA in the second world war (and sometimes the first), sometimes going as far as to claim they won the entire war themselves, but I think most Americans know that isn't the case, accept that the Soviet Union was the most important ally in the European theater, but that the USA was of vital importance in the second world war nonetheless and it would have gone quite differently without them, but that they did not win the war themselves. I think Americans should brag more about their involvement in the Pacific theater than the European one because they were the biggest allied force there.
Exactly. The only time they played an important role was in the Second World War, in the first they joined too late so it wouldn't make a difference in the course of the war.
There were many australians in the Pacific theater aswell.
*still face desk*
Do people not understand that each member was as vital as the next, if it was not for the British and Australian forces in the Pacific Theatre America would of struggled just as much as the next country ... and more than likely lost. I don't think people understand the significance of water and the ocean in General.
Okay think of it like this, imagine attacking a fort with no cannon, your only option is to climb over the wall, but ontop of that wall are people lobbing rocks, poking you with sticks and throwing down your climbing equipment. Much was the same in all beach landings, and the Japenese/Germans had the advantage, the home defencive ... and they used it expertly inflicting 4 to 5 times the losses received and in some cases 10 times the losses.
Without each nations tactical pressure the forces would not of been spread so thinly, thus America would of likely lost pearl habour rather than just lost the battle over it. The japenese had to focus on multiple fronts, by sea they had the American, British and Australians down their necks, to the west were the rebelling chinese and Koreans. Without all these factors combined do you think America would of stood a chance alone as well as fighting the European front? ... hell no.
If America was so vital in the war it would of been able to stand alone, but could it? all wargame thesis point towards no.
No nation played a "Vital role" they were all equal to each others success, this is why it worked, not by having one powerful ally.
Well I think the only logical response is that many overly patriotic Americans do exaggerate the importance of the USA in the second world war (and sometimes the first), sometimes going as far as to claim they won the entire war themselves, but I think most Americans know that isn't the case, accept that the Soviet Union was the most important ally in the European theater, but that the USA was of vital importance in the second world war nonetheless and it would have gone quite differently without them, but that they did not win the war themselves. I think Americans should brag more about their involvement in the Pacific theater than the European one because they were the biggest allied force there.
Exactly. The only time they played an important role was in the Second World War, in the first they joined too late so it wouldn't make a difference in the course of the war.
There were many australians in the Pacific theater aswell.
*still face desk*
Do people not understand that each member was as vital as the next, if it was not for the British and Australian forces in the Pacific Theatre America would of struggled just as much as the next country ... and more than likely lost. I don't think people understand the significance of water and the ocean in General.
Okay think of it like this, imagine attacking a fort with no cannon, your only option is to climb over the wall, but ontop of that wall are people lobbing rocks, poking you with sticks and throwing down your climbing equipment. Much was the same in all beach landings, and the Japenese/Germans had the advantage, the home defencive ... and they used it expertly inflicting 4 to 5 times the losses received and in some cases 10 times the losses.
Without each nations tactical pressure the forces would not of been spread so thinly, thus America would of likely lost pearl habour rather than just lost the battle over it. The japenese had to focus on multiple fronts, by sea they had the American, British and Australians down their necks, to the west were the rebelling chinese and Koreans. Without all these factors combined do you think America would of stood a chance alone as well as fighting the European front? ... hell no.
If America was so vital in the war it would of been able to stand alone, but could it? all wargame thesis point towards no.
No nation played a "Vital role" they were all equal to each others success, this is why it worked, not by having one powerful ally.
Australians and Brits in the Pacific theater were useful but not overly decisive.
The Japanese inflicted 4 to 5 times the causalities on the Americans than the Americans did on them? What are you going on about?
Iwo Jima:Okinawa"Spoiler(https://s21.postimg.org/bwpguke4n/Capture.jpg)[close]Midway Island:Spoiler(https://s21.postimg.org/7laigf2x3/Capture1.jpg)[close]Spoiler(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs23.postimg.org%2Fgtosr2v17%2FCapture2.jpg&hash=a14b5460b149759a95cd593f1f5e58021cc640c7)[close]
The Americans played a huge part due to their economic power. They produced planes,ships,tanks,guns, subs e.t.c all to a massive degree - which Germany could not replicate.
I definitely agree that the Americans didn't play a bigger part than the next allied nation in terms of battles fought but their production of goods is what helped
I think the Master Cheif won world war 2No, it was Viktor Reznov along with Dimitri Prochenko!
VVVOORRKKUUUTTAAI think the Master Cheif won world war 2No, it was Viktor Reznov along with Dimitri Prochenko!
Umm Germany didn't replicate it as it valued Quality over Quantity, it had the fastest fighter planes known to the Monoplane world at the time, the biggest engine in the most compact space, German Engineering was so advanced that the Tiger tank didn't even get outclassed until 1944 with the KV-1S which had a major flaw of having to point the gun down to load it then aim back up at its oponent. Germany managed to create jet fighters and long range bombers before any other nation was capable of doing so ... its Engineering prowess made the largest battleship ever seen of its likes that took nearly an entire navy group to take down ... it took so much fire it was unbeleivable.
German Engineering far outstriped all of the Allied nations total and it was so far ahead of its time with logitical capabilties they are still replicated today, its Flight doctines of using 2 man fighter groups of 4 planes total are still in use today ... it layed down the path for underground fortress structures and how to set out effective lanes of fire for such fortresses.
German Urban warefare was near perfective using submachine guns and tactical placed explosives when leaving a location, as well as the artillery barrages on retreating areas to give cover for escape.
Germany was the peak nation of its time compared to the allies, this is why so many superpowers were needed to take it out. Quality not Quantity.
One can only marvel at what the outcome would have been if they'd managed to secure the Arc of the Covenant.
QuoteUmm Germany didn't replicate it as it valued Quality over Quantity, it had the fastest fighter planes known to the Monoplane world at the time, the biggest engine in the most compact space, German Engineering was so advanced that the Tiger tank didn't even get outclassed until 1944 with the KV-1S which had a major flaw of having to point the gun down to load it then aim back up at its oponent. Germany managed to create jet fighters and long range bombers before any other nation was capable of doing so ... its Engineering prowess made the largest battleship ever seen of its likes that took nearly an entire navy group to take down ... it took so much fire it was unbeleivable.
German Engineering far outstriped all of the Allied nations total and it was so far ahead of its time with logitical capabilties they are still replicated today, its Flight doctines of using 2 man fighter groups of 4 planes total are still in use today ... it layed down the path for underground fortress structures and how to set out effective lanes of fire for such fortresses.
German Urban warefare was near perfective using submachine guns and tactical placed explosives when leaving a location, as well as the artillery barrages on retreating areas to give cover for escape.
Germany was the peak nation of its time compared to the allies, this is why so many superpowers were needed to take it out. Quality not Quantity.
German engineering preferred quality over quantity yes, but that was there main downfall. The tiger tank was too complicated to build and repair and produced in too low numbers. Germany's battleships were from a bigone age - they were destroyed by airpower. German logistics was good yes, but they lacked the supplies and the means to effectively transport it. German urban warfare wasn't revolutionary compared to other nations either. The Soviets used submachine guns to great effect, as did the Americans and the British.
Basically Germany produced quality good yes, but not in enough quantity (or quality) to match the Allied nations.
Tiger is right, the germans had the quality, but not the quantity. That and the social and economic downfall were the main reasons of the defeat of Germany.
Germany tried to fight against the entire world in two devastating wars.. it didn't went too well.
By the way, the Thompson fired .45 ammunition with a 20 round magazine. Such a large round meant ridiculous recoil and such a short magazine meant lolspam had to be concentrated with frequent reloads.
Yes the Tiger I tank was very advanced in battle with its heavy armor and 88mm anti-tank gun. However due to its complex design, mass production and repairing in the field was severely hindered. Good engineering doesn't just include a tanks combat specifications, being easy to repair and able to produce relatively quickly also play a large role. No matter how good the Tiger I tank was, it was not enough to combat the 50,000 M4 Shermans and 80,000 T-34s.
Also you have to remember that when the Germans first went into Russia in 1941; the Russian T-34 and the KV-1 completely outmatched (and out produced) the current germans Pz III and Pz IVs. It was then that the Germans rushed the production of the Tiger I tank to combat the new Russian tanks. However, again, it was not produced in large enough quantity and was unreliable.
Japanese battleships were larger and more powerful than German battleships, yet they were almost defenseless against massed air attacks. The Bismark was sunk from a combination of the Royal Navy and the Swordfish torpedo bomber. Yes the Tirpitz had massive guns which would blow any British ship out of the water - yet they didn't have to face it head to head; they had the air power to destroy the Tirpitz before it even got out of port.
The MP40 wasn't prone to damage no, but it lacked the rate of fire and capacity of the PPSH-41 and the Thompson submachine gun (although the MP-40 out matched the Thompson in production terms). Also the M1 Garand was a very advanced weapon - employed while the Germans (and the other allied nations) were still using bolt-actions weapons.
But we are getting far off topic - USA played one of the biggest roles in WW2 next to Britain and Russia. However they didn't do it alone and probably (its completely impossible to know) couldn't have done it themselves.
If I remember correctly, a Soviet soldier would carry one drum for initial use, and then once that was dry, he'd start using the 35 rounders. I could be mistaken on that though, so don't quote me on it.
Going to stop in briefly, to give my two cents. To generalize America, as the author of the OP's copied document did, is an erroneous practice that won't lead to a valid answer. However, it is reasonable to assume that some Americans think in such a manner. I have met a few, though they usually (usually) stop bleating after one asks them to read a book concerning the period.
As a reminder, remember in your discussion of history to keep emotions out of it. That would be the queue for a fog to fall upon what actually happened, and it would be nice to avoid such a conundrum.
Warm regards, folks.
Going to stop in briefly, to give my two cents. To generalize America, as the author of the OP's copied document did, is an erroneous practice that won't lead to a valid answer. However, it is reasonable to assume that some Americans think in such a manner. I have met a few, though they usually (usually) stop bleating after one asks them to read a book concerning the period.
Going to stop in briefly, to give my two cents. To generalize America, as the author of the OP's copied document did, is an erroneous practice that won't lead to a valid answer. However, it is reasonable to assume that some Americans think in such a manner. I have met a few, though they usually (usually) stop bleating after one asks them to read a book concerning the period.
So the behavior of a few is cause to create a thread titled to lead people to believe the author thinks every American thinks/acts so? Perhaps if I created a thread about those damn imperialist British, always complaining about their rebellious colonies, would that go over well with the large portion of the community that is British, but are by and large not imperialistic assholes?
Do correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I do have the answer:
The reason the community doesn't view (many) of the Brits imperialistic, is because there are no well-known cases in which a British community member described the Brits as 'The Best'. There were however, some good examples of Americans.
Going to stop in briefly, to give my two cents. To generalize America, as the author of the OP's copied document did, is an erroneous practice that won't lead to a valid answer. However, it is reasonable to assume that some Americans think in such a manner. I have met a few, though they usually (usually) stop bleating after one asks them to read a book concerning the period.
So the behavior of a few is cause to create a thread titled to lead people to believe the author thinks every American thinks/acts so? Perhaps if I created a thread about those damn imperialist British, always complaining about their rebellious colonies, would that go over well with the large portion of the community that is British, but are by and large not imperialistic assholes?
Do correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I do have the answer:
The reason the community doesn't view (many) of the Brits imperialistic, is because there are no well-known cases in which a British community member described the Brits as 'The Best'. There were however, some good examples of Americans.
Going to stop in briefly, to give my two cents. To generalize America, as the author of the OP's copied document did, is an erroneous practice that won't lead to a valid answer. However, it is reasonable to assume that some Americans think in such a manner. I have met a few, though they usually (usually) stop bleating after one asks them to read a book concerning the period.
So the behavior of a few is cause to create a thread titled to lead people to believe the author thinks every American thinks/acts so? Perhaps if I created a thread about those damn imperialist British, always complaining about their rebellious colonies, would that go over well with the large portion of the community that is British, but are by and large not imperialistic assholes?
Do correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I do have the answer:
The reason the community doesn't view (many) of the Brits imperialistic, is because there are no well-known cases in which a British community member described the Brits as 'The Best'. There were however, some good examples of Americans.
I can't recall any non-sarcastic or satirical instances where someone claimed America won ww2 singlehandedly, or that they were the "best".
Oh, please.
You know damn well that I am not implying said arguments. It's more like overly overpraising ones country. Fir the examples, I am not going to name anyone, for that will almost certainly mean trouble once my examples would find out.
QuoteOh, please.
You know damn well that I am not implying said arguments. It's more like overly overpraising ones country. Fir the examples, I am not going to name anyone, for that will almost certainly mean trouble once my examples would find out.
Example please? Just give a quote, not the name.
QuoteOh, please.
You know damn well that I am not implying said arguments. It's more like overly overpraising ones country. Fir the examples, I am not going to name anyone, for that will almost certainly mean trouble once my examples would find out.
Example please? Just give a quote, not the name.
Sure, quotes show the names, and as soon as they do find out, Its screwedjust as hard.
Still, I will neither quote nor name.
That does, however not make it recommendable
That does, however not make it recommendableNo. What are they going to do? Hack you ::). Move to America so you can feel free while enlightening us.
A rant about Americans that think they won everything - Written by yahoo answers
I actually thought about one word/war when I saw this.
Vietnam.
I love Americans though ;D
Many Americans are not history junkies like us, which would explain why they have that Vietnam mindset, as well as the "win everything" mindset.
While it is true that we lost the war, I feel that it should be pointed out that the US was not defeated through military means. It was lack of support for the war at home that dealt the death blow.
... in the future, try to find sources that don't involve a comical movie from the 80s.
Source: Apocalypse Now.
I think what shocked me most about the Vietnam war is that American special forces Colonel who went rogue in Cambodia, he ended up living in a village where the natives believed he was a god. Pretty scary stuff.
Source: Apocalypse Now.
Going to stop in briefly, to give my two cents. To generalize America, as the author of the OP's copied document did, is an erroneous practice that won't lead to a valid answer. However, it is reasonable to assume that some Americans think in such a manner. I have met a few, though they usually (usually) stop bleating after one asks them to read a book concerning the period.
So the behavior of a few is cause to create a thread titled to lead people to believe the author thinks every American thinks/acts so? Perhaps if I created a thread about those damn imperialist British, always complaining about their rebellious colonies, would that go over well with the large portion of the community that is British, but are by and large not imperialistic assholes?
guys can i say something who the hell cares ?
guys can i say something who the hell cares ?
i dont ment to be rude but you guys are talking about something 70 years ago
ur ttalking about who the fuck contributed most all that matters is that WERE FUCKING lucky that hitler didnt won so you stfu
Keep the peace in here ;)
Keep the peace in here ;)
Why'd you edit your post?
HURR 'MURICA WON DE WAR AND SAVED UR SORRY ARSES HURR
QuoteHURR 'MURICA WON DE WAR AND SAVED UR SORRY ARSES HURR
The European campaign ended when the Allies, consisting of the British Empire, Free France, USA and the USSR forced the Axis forces back to Germany and eventually back to Berlin where Hilter killed himself in his command bunker.
The Asian campaign ended when the Americans dropped two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the Russian army attacked the Japanese in Manchuria roughly three months later.
Joint Effort like bro's, too bad they weren't ready to stay friends with our soviet comrades.
Btw, what do you guys think: If America/Brittain etc. didn't attack from the West, could Russia have broken through?
Btw, what do you guys think: If America/Brittain etc. didn't attack from the West, could Russia have broken through?
I'm sure they would have. Russia had what seemed to be an almost expendable supply of soldiers. They mustered millions, upon millions, upon millions of men. However, if it were not for the combined efforts for the Allies in the European theater, I assure you, the Siege of Berlin would have ended in utter annihilation of the Russian forces. Germany would have had so many men to spare to fight as a defense force.
The Japanese high command was ready to surrender, the nuclear bombings were totally unneccesary.
The Soviet Union was winning the ground war pretty much on its own till the 1944 Normandy Landings, maybe 1943 with the Italy campaign being a minor nuissance to the Axis.
Exactly man
And the soviet union was winning the ground war in that they repelled the Nazi invasion. They regained most of their occupied land but they did not manage to push into German territory until they got much needed support from the allies on the opposite front.
Exactly man
Not exactly. I disagree that the nuclear bombings were unnecessary because the Japanese would not have agreed to an unconditional surrender without them.
Or the pressure of the soviets would have led them to surrender..
its not about how many died its that they used a nuke which is a mass killer bomb and it was the first of its kind. now the world got advanced nukes which can contaminate the area for 100k years. so nothing will ever grrow there and its dangerous. at this point defending america is very stupid as they invented a bomb that might make an end for humanity thanks usa
its not about how many died its that they used a nuke which is a mass killer bomb and it was the first of its kind. now the world got advanced nukes which can contaminate the area for 100k years. so nothing will ever grrow there and its dangerous. at this point defending america is very stupid as they invented a bomb that might make an end for humanity thanks usa
Clearly the Germans could only use hydrogen for their balloons.(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg9.joyreactor.cc%2Fpics%2Fcomment%2Fgeek-%25D1%2581%25D0%25B5%25D1%2581%25D1%2581%25D0%25B8%25D1%258F-%25D0%25BF%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B7%25D0%25B4%25D0%25B5%25D1%2586-%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B0%25D1%2587%25D0%25B5%25D1%2580%25D1%2582%25D0%25B0%25D1%2582%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BB%25D1%258C%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B0%25D1%258F-%25D0%25B3%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BC%25D0%25B5%25D1%2582%25D1%2580%25D0%25B8%25D1%258F-291199.jpeg&hash=8ce1b591c9b925d66d0eabda6caca5af5a525e64)
still my point is that nukes are dangerous
Nukes will wake up Godzilla.
Nobody will ever use a nuke on another country and here's why.
Mutually assured destruction. If I go down we all go down. Nobody would ever launch a nuke because if they do then they know that they're bound to get twice as many fired back at them.
Nobody will ever use a nuke on another country and here's why.
Mutually assured destruction. If I go down we all go down. Nobody would ever launch a nuke because if they do then they know that they're bound to get twice as many fired back at them.
Yes, in the cold war. In WWII, someone was bound to be the first and only maker of nuclear bombs. Just imagine what would have happened if the Germans had made it.
Yes, and three days before Pearl harbour the US admiral said their navy would never be caught be a surprise attack.What can you expect? Those japs are sneaky.
What they said and thought has very little to do with actual facts.
I think the USA would have been a far more logical decision. Without US, UK would have presumably given up anyway, and it's further away.
I think the USA would have been a far more logical decision. Without US, UK would have presumably given up anyway, and it's further away.
This is a good example of what the thread was about! The Nazi's had given up on Britain as their only effective tactic, Blitzkrieg, had failed in the sky's against the RAF, the Luftwaffe were meant to clear a path for the heavy vehicles to go in but this island will hold no matter what is thrown at it.
Also In north Africa the Nazi's had been defeated by the British. And in Malta the people held against the constant Italian air attacks and remained loyal to Britain.
Britain would not give up, D-Day was already being planned and Churchill was a very powerful figure who made sure the British people did not give up.
America did contribute greatly, together Britain and USA defeated a lot of Nazi's but the real heroes were the Soviets.
I think the USA would have been a far more logical decision. Without US, UK would have presumably given up anyway, and it's further away.
This is a good example of what the thread was about! The Nazi's had given up on Britain as their only effective tactic, Blitzkrieg, had failed in the sky's against the RAF, the Luftwaffe were meant to clear a path for the heavy vehicles to go in but this island will hold no matter what is thrown at it.
Also In north Africa the Nazi's had been defeated by the British. And in Malta the people held against the constant Italian air attacks and remained loyal to Britain.
Britain would not give up, D-Day was already being planned and Churchill was a very powerful figure who made sure the British people did not give up.
America did contribute greatly, together Britain and USA defeated a lot of Nazi's but the real heroes were the Soviets.
I think the USA would have been a far more logical decision. Without US, UK would have presumably given up anyway, and it's further away.
This is a good example of what the thread was about! The Nazi's had given up on Britain as their only effective tactic, Blitzkrieg, had failed in the sky's against the RAF, the Luftwaffe were meant to clear a path for the heavy vehicles to go in but this island will hold no matter what is thrown at it.
Also In north Africa the Nazi's had been defeated by the British. And in Malta the people held against the constant Italian air attacks and remained loyal to Britain.
Britain would not give up, D-Day was already being planned and Churchill was a very powerful figure who made sure the British people did not give up.
America did contribute greatly, together Britain and USA defeated a lot of Nazi's but the real heroes were the Soviets.
Heroes?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany
I think the USA would have been a far more logical decision. Without US, UK would have presumably given up anyway, and it's further away.
This is a good example of what the thread was about! The Nazi's had given up on Britain as their only effective tactic, Blitzkrieg, had failed in the sky's against the RAF, the Luftwaffe were meant to clear a path for the heavy vehicles to go in but this island will hold no matter what is thrown at it.
Also In north Africa the Nazi's had been defeated by the British. And in Malta the people held against the constant Italian air attacks and remained loyal to Britain.
Britain would not give up, D-Day was already being planned and Churchill was a very powerful figure who made sure the British people did not give up.
America did contribute greatly, together Britain and USA defeated a lot of Nazi's but the real heroes were the Soviets.
Everyone in the allies contributed to the defeat of the axis. That's the point of our argument.
The soviets lost a terrible number of soldiers and civilians in the war but they didn't fought the war alone, it was a joint war where everyone contributed.
I think the USA would have been a far more logical decision. Without US, UK would have presumably given up anyway, and it's further away.
This is a good example of what the thread was about! The Nazi's had given up on Britain as their only effective tactic, Blitzkrieg, had failed in the sky's against the RAF, the Luftwaffe were meant to clear a path for the heavy vehicles to go in but this island will hold no matter what is thrown at it.
Also In north Africa the Nazi's had been defeated by the British. And in Malta the people held against the constant Italian air attacks and remained loyal to Britain.
Britain would not give up, D-Day was already being planned and Churchill was a very powerful figure who made sure the British people did not give up.
America did contribute greatly, together Britain and USA defeated a lot of Nazi's but the real heroes were the Soviets.
Heroes?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany
You know what I mean.I think the USA would have been a far more logical decision. Without US, UK would have presumably given up anyway, and it's further away.
This is a good example of what the thread was about! The Nazi's had given up on Britain as their only effective tactic, Blitzkrieg, had failed in the sky's against the RAF, the Luftwaffe were meant to clear a path for the heavy vehicles to go in but this island will hold no matter what is thrown at it.
Also In north Africa the Nazi's had been defeated by the British. And in Malta the people held against the constant Italian air attacks and remained loyal to Britain.
Britain would not give up, D-Day was already being planned and Churchill was a very powerful figure who made sure the British people did not give up.
America did contribute greatly, together Britain and USA defeated a lot of Nazi's but the real heroes were the Soviets.
Everyone in the allies contributed to the defeat of the axis. That's the point of our argument.
The soviets lost a terrible number of soldiers and civilians in the war but they didn't fought the war alone, it was a joint war where everyone contributed.
But I am implying the Soviets killed more, i'm not pro Soviet or anything. In-fact on cRPG forums someone decided to call me a "British Nationalistic Retard" :L
its not about how many died its that they used a nuke which is a mass killer bomb and it was the first of its kind. now the world got advanced nukes which can contaminate the area for 100k years. so nothing will ever grrow there and its dangerous. at this point defending america is very stupid as they invented a bomb that might make an end for humanity thanks usa
its not about how many died its that they used a nuke which is a mass killer bomb and it was the first of its kind. now the world got advanced nukes which can contaminate the area for 100k years. so nothing will ever grrow there and its dangerous. at this point defending america is very stupid as they invented a bomb that might make an end for humanity thanks usa
I guess capitalization and punctation are optional where you live. Besides that, what are you talking about? Could you please show me evidence of a atomic weapon that irradiates an area for 100,000 years? As far as I know, that doesn't exist. This leads me to the end of your statement, "at this point defending america is very stupid as they invented a bomb that might make an end for humanity thanks usa". What? What does that even mean?
Tsernobyl, it's very well possible that a bomb may do the same.
Now, there is a difference between supidity, and bravoury. Sovjet (mostly officers) were of the stupid kind.
And, Walko, it does seem like you haven't got anything useful to say, when your first sentence is a grammar statement.
i made a mistake but i'm not completely wrong first off the chernobyl accident will take 48k years before the radiation is removed. Its still a long time
And second of all the reason why Usa detonated that bomb was to show that they were the greatest and the biggest. And walko i think ur the first one that didnt realiase that i was sarcastic congratulations. what i was meaning is that thank you usa its ur fault that u made the bomb that will kill millions or maybe billions.
i read it on a book and chernobyl was an accident it wasnt a bomb
Source on Chernobyl please? Well, I believe the reason the United States dropped the bomb was to prevent a land invasion of Japan.
Maybe you should know what you are talking about before you make blanket statements.
Let's just try to look at this from an unemotional perspective. Numbers and facts argue much better than opinions and whims.
This has been my attempt to prevent future derailment. Good day.
On another note, if anyone does tell you this, direct them to the nearest book on the Eastern Front of WWII.
thank you usa its ur fault that u made the bomb that will kill millions or maybe billions.
Developing cancer trying to comprehend the italics and ignorance.
Developing cancer trying to comprehend the italics and ignorance.
This reply is hilarious, I was only correcting Masterborn's error so I don't know what you mean by "ignorance".
This reply is hilarious, I was only correcting Masterborn's error so I don't know what you mean by "ignorance".
I don't think he was referring to your posts when he mentioned ignorance. (Though I might be wrong.)
i read it on a book and chernobyl was an accident it wasnt a bomb
Your reading comprehension is extremely weak, when he said "bomb" he was refering to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki not Chernobyl.
Source on Chernobyl please? Well, I believe the reason the United States dropped the bomb was to prevent a land invasion of Japan.
Maybe you should know what you are talking about before you make blanket statements.
Come back when you learn to make reasonable arguments.
i read it on a book and chernobyl was an accident it wasnt a bomb
Your reading comprehension is extremely weak, when he said "bomb" he was refering to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki not Chernobyl.
Source on Chernobyl please? Well, I believe the reason the United States dropped the bomb was to prevent a land invasion of Japan.
Maybe you should know what you are talking about before you make blanket statements.
Come back when you learn to make reasonable arguments.
What do you mean? I thought my argument was rather reasonable.
its funny that u quote walko just sayin
Top quality thread contribution.
I think the USA would have been a far more logical decision. Without US, UK would have presumably given up anyway, and it's further away.
This is a good example of what the thread was about! The Nazi's had given up on Britain as their only effective tactic, Blitzkrieg, had failed in the sky's against the RAF, the Luftwaffe were meant to clear a path for the heavy vehicles to go in but this island will hold no matter what is thrown at it.
Also In north Africa the Nazi's had been defeated by the British. And in Malta the people held against the constant Italian air attacks and remained loyal to Britain.
Britain would not give up, D-Day was already being planned and Churchill was a very powerful figure who made sure the British people did not give up.
America did contribute greatly, together Britain and USA defeated a lot of Nazi's but the real heroes were the Soviets.
Heroes?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany
Although the nuclear bombings were certainly a factor in Japanese surrender but the reason they surrendered was because of the Russian invasion of Japan which was going on simultaneously.
It was done to send a message to Stalin.
And the other reason why they didnt open a second front earlier was because Churchil didn't want it because he was reacquiring their british colonies.
Although the nuclear bombings were certainly a factor in Japanese surrender but the reason they surrendered was because of the Russian invasion of Japan which was going on simultaneously.
It was done to send a message to Stalin.
And the other reason why they didnt open a second front earlier was because Churchil didn't want it because he was reacquiring their british colonies.
And the other reason why they didnt open a second front earlier was because Churchil didn't want it because he was reacquiring their british colonies.
QuoteAnd the other reason why they didnt open a second front earlier was because Churchil didn't want it because he was reacquiring their british colonies.
What was the mindset in maintaining colonies if it was going to be lost eventually?
I think the USA would have been a far more logical decision. Without US, UK would have presumably given up anyway, and it's further away.
This is a good example of what the thread was about! The Nazi's had given up on Britain as their only effective tactic, Blitzkrieg, had failed in the sky's against the RAF, the Luftwaffe were meant to clear a path for the heavy vehicles to go in but this island will hold no matter what is thrown at it.
Also In north Africa the Nazi's had been defeated by the British. And in Malta the people held against the constant Italian air attacks and remained loyal to Britain.
Britain would not give up, D-Day was already being planned and Churchill was a very powerful figure who made sure the British people did not give up.
America did contribute greatly, together Britain and USA defeated a lot of Nazi's but the real heroes were the Soviets.
Heroes?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany
Your countries troops weren't so nice either.
- Canicattì Massacre: At least 8 unarmed Italian civilians killed by US troops. One of the civilians being an 11 year old girl.
- Dachau Massacre: Around 123 German POWs executed at the Dachau concentration camp.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/Tq29J9L.jpg)[close]
- Biscari Massacre: Two instances of mass murder, killing roughly 75 POWs at Biscari.
- Operation Teardrop: Captured crewmen from the sunk German submarine, the U-546, were tortured by US Military Personnel.
- After the Malmedy massacre, a written order from the HQ of the 328th US Army Infantry Regiment stated that: No SS troops or paratroopers will be taken prisoner but will be shot on sight.
Major-General Raymond Hufft gave instructions to his men to not take prisoners when they cross the Rhine in 1945. Later on after the war, he reflected on the war crimes he authorized, saying: 'if the Germans had won, I would have been on trial at Nuremberg instead of them.'
Stephen Ambrose also said "I've interviewed well over 1000 combat veterans. Only one of them said he shot a prisoner... Perhaps as many as one-third of the veterans...however, related incidents in which they saw other GIs shooting unarmed German prisoners who had their hands up."
- The town of Audouville-la-Hubert was the scene of a murder of around 30 disarmed POWs by American paratroopers in 1944. It is strongly believed that it was the 101st Airborne Division.
- Wartime films only made public in 2006, show that American GIs committed over 400 sexual offenses, including 126 rapes in England, between 1942 and 1945.
Also, a study by Robert J. Lilly estimates that a total of 14,000 civilian women in England, France and Germany were raped by American GIs during the Second World War.
Oh, yeah, that was only in Europe.
Will make a statenent here, in seriousness:
Riddlez already claricied he also likes philosophy.
Will make a statenent here, in seriousness:
Riddlez already claricied he also likes philosophy.
I will not be harsh with you because I like philosophy as well.
But edit that "statenent", please.